I think you're confusing SAN with NAS where SANs are fully supported (being locally attached through the fiber channel). However, NAS is now supported by Microsoft for Exchange assuming the NAS is on the HCL - though I don't believe (and I liable to be proved wrong here) that there are no NAS systems on the HCL as yet (see Q317172 and 317173).
Tris ---------------------------------------------------- Tristan Gayford Deputy Systems & Network Manager Cranfield University at Silsoe -----Original Message----- From: Tony Hlabse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 26 February 2002 11:31 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: Win 95 Outlook 2000 Clients unable to connect to Exchange5.5 I know that MS Exchange is not supported in a SAN environment. Has to do with write thru cache or something like that. There are articles on this on this in MS's website. Does the SAN box do some self maintenance on Saturday nite. If you call PSS they might not have an answer due to the SAN setup. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Darren Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 4:38 AM Subject: Re: Win 95 Outlook 2000 Clients unable to connect to Exchange5.5 > Answers to all the responses so far. > > * Nothing appears to running on Saturday night and nothing comes up in > the event logs. > > * Everything at TCPIP level is fine, ie users can resolve the servers > address. The WINS might have changed as we have added two more servers > for Fault Tolerance. > > * The new hardware differences include :- > > * Data & OS now resides on a SAN > * Network is now a Team of Compaq Gigabit & Compaq Ethernet, > provides a virtual interface to the users. > * Servers now have 4 processors instead of 2 > * Servers have 2GB Memory instead of �GB > * The two physical network interfaces go into 2 different CISCO > switches for fault tolerance. > > We are planning to increase Exchange logging and run some NetMon > traces this weekend to try and get some more info on this problem. > > Thanks > > Darren > > > > What happens on Saturday nite. Do you have some routine running that > > is causing this. Event logs show anything? > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Stidley, Joel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: "Exchange Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Monday, February 25, 2002 3:25 PM > > Subject: RE: Win 95 Outlook 2000 Clients unable to connect to Exchange5.5 > > > > > > Can the clients resolve the name of the server when they are having > > the problem? Are the WINS settings correct on the new servers? > > > > > > Joel > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Soysal, Serdar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Monday, February 25, 2002 1:50 PM > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: RE: Win 95 Outlook 2000 Clients unable to connect to > > Exchange5.5 > > > > It could be a network-component related issue. Does rebooting the > > client also correct the problem? I would suspect it would. What is > > different with > > the new hardware? Is it connected to the same switch etc? > > > > Serdar Soysal > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Darren Williams [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Monday, February 25, 2002 6:13 AM > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: Win 95 Outlook 2000 Clients unable to connect to Exchange > > 5.5 > > > > > > We have a very weird problem at the moment. > > > > We have 4 servers of which 3 have been migrated to new hardware and > > the data is held within a SAN. The servers are performing well and > > servicing clients. > > > > However, it seems to be only on a Saturday night, we get occurences > > of Win95 clients running Outlook 2000 not being able to connect to > > Exchange. If the > > server is rebooted they then can access their mail, if Outlook is > > reinstalled on the client they can also access their mail. > > > > There is nothing at all appearing in the event logs on the Exchange > > servers so we are a little stumped on this one. > > > > Our other users using Win2K and NT don't seem to be affected and the > > 4th server which hasn't been migrated yet is also not affected. > > > > Any thoughts appreciated. > > > > Thanks > > > > Darren > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > _________________________________________________________________ > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > _________________________________________________________________ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _________________________________________________________________ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
